MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prototype Decision-Support System for Designing and Costing Municipal Green Infrastructure

2014· article· en· W2087260166 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Urban Planning and Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReuseUsabilityActivity-based costingValuation (finance)SuiteDecision support systemLand useSubsidyEnvironmental economicsComputer scienceTransport engineeringBusinessEnvironmental planningEngineeringCivil engineeringGeographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing momentum across many municipal jurisdictions in North America to reuse public and privately held vacant and underutilized urban land on a temporary to potentially permanent basis for community-centered and community-driven projects. Some uses include urban agriculture, parks and open spaces, and linear bikeway or walkway connections. Across many jurisdictions, limited resources have been allocated to inventorying and determining the valuation of these urban assets and their potential to contribute to a city’s green infrastructure capacity. The purpose of this research is to add an augmented capacity to an existing Microsoft Excel-based decision-support tool that captures the condition and location of vacant and underutilized land, calculates the relative suitability of the inventoried land for a suite of reuse strategies, and allows the user to evaluate location-allocation modeling scenarios. The additional capacity introduced herein provides users with the ability to produce a scaled design drawing for each allocated reuse strategy, and subsequently perform a life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) based on user-defined design scenarios. The application of the design and costing tool, known as DECO, to a portion of an underutilized hydro utility corridor in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, is presented and discussed to demonstrate the usability and inherent benefits of a graphically based LCCA approach. While developed as a decision-support tool for application by community groups, DECO has the potential to assist municipal planning staff and private and public land owners in clarifying the trade-offs between various design alternatives, given a specified life-cycle length. DECO is designed to allow the user to perform a series of “what-if” scenarios/sensitivity analyses to aid in well-informed green infrastructure investment decisions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it